- From: Daniel W. Connolly <connolly@beach.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 21:13:36 -0400
- To: jag@scndprsn.eng.sun.com (James Gosling)
- Cc: brian@organic.com, tmyerson@iserver.interse.com, www-talk@w3.org
In message <9507182040.AA09151@norquay.Eng.Sun.COM>, James Gosling writes: >> >> ******* I. The Request-ID: header field: >> ******* II. The business-card authentication scheme > >The problem I have with many schemes like this (leaving the ethical >questions alone for now!) is that they don't work in the face of proxy >caching. No fair! I said there was a requisite IVth part that I didn't have time to discuss, which is exactly this issue. > One >solution to have a header field in the reply that contains >something like this: > > aggregate-demographics: email-addr > >Which if recieved by a proxy server would cause it to accumulate some >standard set of useful-but-not-invasive statistics (if such exist!) >about uses of the page and mail them to the email address on a >periodic basis. Yes, let's hammer this out, shall we? HTTP 1.1 will include a notion of "manditory" stuff. How does one express it? I'll fudge it for now. I think HTTP put is as likely a mechanism as email. So perhaps we'd see: 200 Okie fnokey Content-Type: text/html Mandatory: Log-To: Log-To: mailto:web-logs@wired.com; content-type=text/x-CLFF; interval=3600 <title>cool stuff!</title> ... or ... Log-To: http://www.wired.com/web-logs; content-type=text/x-CLFF ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ala form ENCTYPE The interval parameter (in seconds) tells how often to submit the logs; or, more precisely, how long you can hold onto log data before giving it to the origin server. Dan
Received on Tuesday, 18 July 1995 21:15:57 UTC